Skip to main content
5:00 pm
know what they say. all of us here and millions of americans across the country will also need to be advocates. the president has already stated very clearly, he's not going to be able to do this by himself. anyone with any sense would know that. this is an american issue. we have a violence problem in this country. and that's the issue that needs to be addressed and so it will be an all-out effort, a bunch of other things going on. the president's got to be focused on, frk -- of course, sequestration and budget and a billion other things that i don't know anything about. . saving lives is go to go the right thing to do. >> can you give us an example of the actions today that don't require congressional approval to keep weapons out of the hands of people? >> administrative actions? i think certainly putting appropriate information into the data base is going to make a
5:01 pm
difference. we know that it's been woefully lacking information concerning criminal records. only eight states that really supply the vast majority of information in that system. so i think that alone is going to make a jay or difference. you are talking about the administrative part. >> the president talked about the fact that it's going to be up to the people. what can you do in your own community? what do you do now? >> on a personal level, certainly communicating back home in philadelphia what the president has laid out. just yesterday as you may know, i talked about a set of principles the sandy hook premises we will be following in philadelphia trying to change and influence corporate behavior and business practices, gun
5:02 pm
manufacturers, distribute toirs and retail ters. this will be a topic of conversation at the u.s. conference of mayors. so mayors from all across america, small, medium and large cities will be joining this effort to move forward with regard to what the president has laid out, communicating with congress and equally important, if not more important, the american people, their constituents as was mentioned earlier. this is a country where people do get to exercise their voice. and for those, again, who are opposed, you know, that door swings both ways and the voices of the people need to be heard and i'm going to spend my time making sure my citizens have as much for as possible and communicating. it's a fight worth fighting and it's a fight we must win. thanks a lot everybody.
5:03 pm
[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> among the proposals the president announced today, background checks for all gun buyers. firearms purchased at gun shows don't require background checks. the president wants to ban assault weapons with high-capacity magazines. he said he would seek more mental health treatment and putting police officers in schools. he signed today 23 executive orders dealing with gun violence, one would direct the centers for disease control to research the causes of gun violence and ways to prevent it and updating the data base on gun sales. and tonight, we will share you his comments once again this evening at 8:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. president obama is officially inaugurated for a second term on sunday at the white house. coverage begins at 10:30 a.m. eastern with a look back at the 2009 inaugural address.
5:04 pm
monday, live all-day coverage begins at 7:00 a.m. earn. at noon, the president takes the oath of office and will be followed by a luncheon inside the capitol. today at the national press club, representatives from the presidential inaugural committee, the joint congressional nugral committee and capitol police held a joint news conference. this is 50 minutes. >> thank you. thank you very much. and thank you press club, for hosting us today. this is going to be a little bit of a dance. there is a lot of different players that are involved in the events that will be taking place over the next few days. my name is brent cole burn. i'm the communications director for the presidential inaugural committee. and we are involved in this
5:05 pm
weekend, doing a lot of the public events that fall outside the official swearing-in, which matt can talk to. in fact, as i kind of think about this, it may make sense to do this in sections. matt, if you want to walk on this. the three main groups that really put this together is the pick and we represent the president and vice president's equities in there. we are a governmental organization that is set up every four years to represent the president and vice president's views. we worked with the j.t.f. on the parade and the official inaugural ball and some of the other events that you will hear about, the national prayer service and the kids' concerts. and official swearing-in pieces
5:06 pm
and j.t.f. which does the military piece of this the colonel will talk about from a support stand point. and thank you to our law enforcement partners who are represented by the d.c. police department today. and there is a huge law enforcement presence to keep us safe over the next four, five days. matt, do you want to talk about what you guys will be doing. >> good morning everybody. miami matt house, i'm the press secretary for the joint congressional committee on inaugural ceremonies. our purview is primarily everything happening on capitol hill. staff has been involved in planning our activities for a year. the inauguration preparations begin the minute the previous one ends. the rules committee in the senate has been hard at work preparing for monday and i wanted to talk very briefly
5:07 pm
about our theme for monday and walk through some of the components very briefly and i'm happy to answer additional questions at the end. the theme for this year is faith in america's future. a theme that was selected by chairman schumer and spent a lot of time talking about it. this marks the 150th year since the completion of the capitol dome with the statue of freedom being placed on the top. the project began in the 1850's and stopped midway through when the civil war broke out. and there was a question among congress and the president as to whether we could fight a civil war and finish the dome. president lincoln said if people see the capitol going on, it's a sign that we intend, the union shall go on. congress came together and were able to complete the capitol dome in the midst of the civil war and senator schumer selected this theme knowing that we have challenges that we face as a country now. but if you look back what we
5:08 pm
accomplished 150 years, we can find faith in america's future and overcome obstacles. these are the remarks throughout the day and in some of the program material to folks who will be seeing the ceremonies and you will see in various elements throughout the program. the day for our committee really begins at 9:00 when the members head to the white house for a coffee and tea with the president. senator mcconnell joins that group. from there, there is coffee with the president, vice president, the first lady and dr. biden as well. everyone begins to make their way back to the capitol at 10, 10:30, depending on how the coffee and tea proceeds. our members come and they are there and get ahead of the president. they'll geet the president and senator schumer as they come in on the senate side of the capitol at 10:40 and everyone goes into the capitol and we
5:09 pm
start the proceedings out with dignitaries, and it begins at 11:00. it proceeds for 30 minutes when the president is introduced out onto the platform. senator schumer opens the ceremonies with a few remarks and brent will talk about how the program proceeds from there. from folks coming to the mall to watch the ceremony or the ticketted area, we will be opening the doors at 7:00 a.m. and advised everyone to make sure they are there by 9:30 to make sure there is time for screening and everyone can get flew to their ticketted place in time to see the festivities. we have a number of crowd management strategies to improve on of the systems that were in place last time because of the issues people experienced trying to get into the ceremonies. we have planned for many, many
5:10 pm
months for crowds of all sizes. we think we have a great system in place to make sure everyone who has a ticket or coming to the nonticketted area on the mall can see the ceremonies. i will go into that during the question and answer session. >> thank you, matt. just to complete a little bit what the monday portion will look like at the capitol. senator schumer will welcome us as the chair and we will begin a run of show, if you will, for the inauguration day for the ceremonial swearing-in. vice president biden will administer the oath of office. the first latino justice to do a swearing-in for a president or vice president and fourth woman. and that will be done on the biden family bible, same one uzbekistanned by vice president biden four years ago and used throughout his swearings-in as senator.
5:11 pm
james taylor will sing "america, the beautiful" and president obama will be administered the oath of office. it is done by supreme court justice john roberts and two bibles used this time. first is the linchingon bible, this was useed by the president four years ago and same bible used by president linchingon when he was sworn in for the first time in 1861 and that will be on top of the king family bible which has been provided for this ceremony by the king family. kelly clarkson will sing "my country t inch s of thee" and there will be a poem read. we are excited that richard bla nmp co will be -- blanco will be joining us.
5:12 pm
reverend louis leon will be overseeing the traditional st. john's service that kicks off the president's day on mopped and will be offering the prayer and beyonce will be singing the national anthem. these historic bibles, and they are symbolic bibles as we head into the 150th anniversary of the emancipation proclamation and with that, i would like to hand it over to our partners and talk about the inaugural parade, which will take place after the lunch that matt discussed. >> thank you. i'm colonel michelle roberts. and our task force has the responsibility for planning and coordinating all of the military ceremonial support for the inaugural activities. once the luncheon is complete,
5:13 pm
the president and the first lady, the vice president and the second lady will be escorted out to the east front of the capitol, where they will be greeted by the commander of the task force and he will escort them down the steps to take the review. and the review is presidential escort unit which is comprised of approximately 380 service members. followed by each of the service honor guards and the u.s. army band as well as the marine corps band. and they will go past the president's location on the steps on the east front of the capitol. and once they complete the pass and review. then the presidential escort, they fall into the motorcade and they start the parade route. along the parade route, we have
5:14 pm
approximately 2,300 military personnel participating in the parade. approximately 10,000 total personnel in the parade. and the way the parade is organized, there are five divisions in this parade. each division is led by a service component. so division one will be led by the army. division two, by the marines. division three by the navy. division four by the air force. and division five by a mixture of the coast guard and merchant marines. and essentially, it's comprised of military bands. service elements that represent the active reserve and national guard components and followed by thears civilian groups that have applied to be in the parade. along the entire parade route is the military cordon. that is comprised of 1,500
5:15 pm
service members from all services. for the activities at the capitol, we have approximately 800 military service members there performing various functions from the presidential escort to bands, to the herald trumpets, the presidential salute battery, usual shears and military -- ushers and military assistants. >> what branch of the service are you in? >> i'm army. >> colonel roberts did not give the j.t.f. credit for the work they do. it's not just the parade piece. there are people that work on this inaugural weekend for months and some cases up to a year beforehand preparing for whomever is elected in november
5:16 pm
and someone who participated in the inaugural for president obama four years ago and we had no idea what we were doing, i can tell you the folks, regardless of who the chair is and the folks at j.t.f. are there ready for you when you walk in the door and do the logistical lift. we make sure the president's imprint is put on one of these events. in the parade as the colonel mentioned along with all of these military elements, there are 58 different groups. 58 different groups, floats and vehicles. these are from all 50 states. they are everything from the virginia military institute just across the river in virginia, down in southern virginia, which has marched in a number of inaugural parades through a group of maine of unicyclists, which are called the jim
5:17 pm
dandies. they will pass review in front of the white house. the president will stand and watch the entire review and enjoy the parade along with thousands of folks who will come down and be watching from along the parade route. once that ends, the president goes inside and the official part of his day is done. and he gets ready for the inaugural balls. as you have seen and reported, there are two inaugural balls this time. the first is the commander in chief's ball. it is a tradition that was started by george bush that we have continued. and chance for us to honor our partners in the military. and i know j.t.f. has been included in the selection process for the individuals that will be attending. mostly enlisted personnel from all the branches. and then second larger inaugural ball. i will be happy to answer questions about that inaugural
5:18 pm
ball as we get into the question and answer portion. before we go into the saturday events, i want to invite our partners from capitol police, security not just for monday but the entire weekend of activities. >> good morning everyone. my name is officer antrobus. i'm the public information officer for the united states capitol police. my title is public information officer. i'm an officer.
5:19 pm
the united states capitol police our responsibility in conjunction with our law enforcement partners is to ensure the safety of those attending the inaugural ceremonies throughout the weekend. first and foremost, we want everyone to enjoy the democratic process and this historic day. with any event that occurs on the capitol complex, safety is our number one priority. that said, safety and security for guests, public, et cetera, is not carried out just by us, but in partnership with our law enforcement community, metropolitan police, united states secret service, park police and other entities as well as public safety entities. the partnership that we have established to create a pretty robust plan has been in the works for many months and while i cannot go into detail about
5:20 pm
those -- about the security plan, please know we have trained extensively to address any issues that may come up during the day. thank you. >> thank you, officer. i appreciate that. as someone that did squret communications before heading back to the campaign last year, the officer had the easiest job because he can say i'm not allowed to say that. that is the main day, monday, couple of other events we wanted to highlight. saturday is a big day for us, two traditions that were started in 2009 by the first family, national day of service and kids' inaugural children's concert. the national day of service will be taking place across the country, events in all 50 states and a large event down here on the mall. chelsea clinton has joined us as the honorary co-chair and will
5:21 pm
be appearing at the mall event in the large tent that you have seen as you have driven down 14th street and will be joined by eva longoria, ben folls as well as 100 organizations from all across the capitol region and folks will be able to go down and talk to these people. it's a fair-type atmosphere and learn how to serve in our community. we will have events in all 50 states. right now we are on track over 2,000 events across the country and this is the first inaugural committee that has paid for staff in all 50 states because this a priority of the first family to see this service day, both to honor the memory of martin luther king junior and also a tradition we hope will live on and become part of
5:22 pm
inaugurations regardless who is in our position in four years. one more event on saturday evening, the kids' inaugural children's concert. this was started by dr. biden and first lady michelle obama. an extension of their work they have done through the joining forces initiative to help honor and support military families and will take place at the convention septemberer, which is where both balls will take place. we will put out details of talent. we have put out an initial list of talent that will be appearing at the balls on monday night and the kids' concert. this is a logistical lift to get that all pieced together as a puzzle and we hope by friday to announce which acts will be appearing. over half of the audience will be made up of military kids and this is a great place to honor the men and women and families that support them.
5:23 pm
on tuesday, jumping ahead, there will be the traditional prayer service taking place at the national cathedral. the first and second family will attend. this is a tradition that is part of most inaugurals and we will be announcing the running show on that. we are wourking with the cathedral who will be there and the president will be there and nice to cap off four days of public celebration. i think that's everything we've got in terms of the run of show. i'm sure you will have a number of questions. making sure i didn't miss anything and the number of events that we cover. i think that's about it. more than happy to open it up to questions at this point. and again, i would just be remiss if i didn't say thank to all of our partners and law enforcement partners headed by the u.s. capitol police and the united states secret service. >> one item of housekeeping
5:24 pm
before we go to questions, if i recognize you, if you could identify yourself by name and your news organization and in the time we have for questions, we'll try to get to you as many as we can. start in the front. >> nbc news. my question is for you, matt. you mentioned that you hope to have some significant improvements in security for monday. it's important for the public to get in, but here we are concerned with media. some networks missed air due to lines, 3:00, 4:00 in the morning. can we expect improvements on that? >> across the board there will be improvements in the flow of every person in and out of the capitol. we will be shoing media guidelines in the next day or so that will make clear the movements and we have been planning for many months to accommodate the individuals who are having dre detentionals. and everyone should be on the
5:25 pm
same page where folks can and can't go. we are making accommodations that will have more details in folks interesting on broadcasting from the capitol on sunday around the events that are happening that day. we have a good plan in place. >> if i could add to that not as much on the media side but the public side, we do have the advantage of having done this four years. a lot of the planning steps we took, we are trying to learn from some of the challenges last time. and one of the reasons we have consolidated the two balls into the convention center where they were spread over four, five locations, was to decrease our footprint and a more manageable process for law enforcement partners and folks who are teapeding. our hope is that the flow in and out of the official ceremony and the other events will be smooth. i know they put out a great
5:26 pm
online tool for the public announced earlier, a mobile web app that matt can speak to, but speaks to what is going on here in d.c. and it's part of our effort to make sure that people across the country can be involved and live streaming of the actual event and lot of information on the day of service. and logistical information for people who are attending the event. between those tools and twitter and other social media to hopefully make this as smooth a process as possible and put in a plug for j.t.f. who has their presence online as well. we have seen a big leap forward on how we are using social media to make it a smoother event. >> i was wondering if you could address how much -- what the cost is, what the price tag is for all of the preparations. and also in addition to the
5:27 pm
hispanic people involved, any other hispanic celebrities or national leaders that will be joining the celebrations over the four-day --? >> i'll deaver on the cost issues. there are a -- i'll defer on the cost issues. ascertaining an overall cost before the event is difficult. we tally up some of these bills after the event. in terms of the hispanic community's involvement, the president is committed to making sure and the leaders involved are making sure that this is an event that reflects america. there are a number of groups not just from the hispanic community but from other communities that really show not just our geographic diversity but also
5:28 pm
cult yourself. the inaugural poet will be a hispanic american. the been dick shon is being give -- benediction is being given by a cuban american. and eva longoria. but i think when you look up on the official dais, it does reflect the country. >> and to that point as far as you know latino participation, senator schumer invited reverend luis cortez and has done a tremendous amount of work to fight crime and poverty and make sure that individuals across the country have access to affordable housing and
5:29 pm
affordable education and senator schumer will open with a prayer in recognition of his long history of service. >> and if i could really quick, this doesn't speak to the hispanic-american community, but looking through my notes, we wanted to make sure that everyone knew that evers williams who is the widow of slain civil rights meger fers will be kinging off an event. so we think that that will be a nice way to open the event and a nice nod towards the civil rights movement in the part it has played not only in the president's life but in the country's life. >> i just want to know how many
5:30 pm
foreign dignitaries are coming and if there is a list for that and where they will be seated. >> from our standpoint, i believe we are still finalizing the list of individuals who will attend and we will have more information on that in the coming days. the diplomatic corps has been seated on the platform. about 1,600 guests that are seated on the platform and the president and his party and the vice president and his family and guests, governors, the house and the senate, supreme court, joint chiefs and the diplomatic corps will be there. it's a group north of about 150 generally, but more details on that in the coming days. >> the question is for mr. colburn. there have been questions raised about the transparency of your committee in regards to donor-related information that
5:31 pm
hasn't been released. could you address those. >> the committee according to the regulations, has to file 90 days after the inaugural takes place and will include information on donors and this is unique to the committee. it is a carveout on the regulations. we are providing donors on a weekly basis, the names given to the community. this is a step above the regulations placed down by the f.c.c. and go to our web site. >> it's not a transparent -- >> i said at the beginning, we don't want follow-up questions. we want to give everyone a chance. >> [inaudible question] >> we are on track to meet the goal. we have every comfort we will have the resources we need to put on all the events we
5:32 pm
discussed and feel comfortable at our fundraising. i'm not going to get into specific numbers. >> you haven't told us anything about the president's day on sunday. could you talk about the official swearing-in and what else he will do that day. what will he do for the day of service and -- >> i can answer, i don't know to a number of those. i don't know where bruce springsteen is. he is not part of the talent line-up. i don't know where the boss will or won't be. on sunday, this is a schedule that is driven by our partners at the white house. and those are questions they can answer. when inauguration day falls on a sunday, the public is held the following monday which is what we walked through with matt, myself and the colonel. that being said, according to
5:33 pm
the constitution he has to be sworn in on june 20 by noon. small ceremony and pool press, so it will be available for the people to see. it will be in the blue room. the president will literally walk in. chief justice roberts will be there to administer the oath and will be using the robinson bible for that. this is the first lady's family bible. he will do the oath and that will be it. it will be a quick official, but very important ceremony. the vice president will do the same thing earlier that day. that is due to scheduling. that will be up at the vice president's residence. again, with immediate family. he will be sworn in on the biden family bible. the same one will be used on monday that he used four years ago. in between those two, a wreath-laying at arlington.
5:34 pm
this will be different that you have seen. much more low-key affair and very similar to the one they did four years ago. two of them laying a wreath and marking the importance of those who have served their country and given their lives as we get ready for the events on monday. that's what i know. [inaudible question] >> both the bidens and the obamas will participate on saturday. that will be here in the metro area. we have a number of cabinet officials that will be participating and we will be making announcements on that in the coming days. as you know, odds are you will know when it happens, but they will be doing something and that will be the entire family. >> just a follow-up on the fundraising question, if you
5:35 pm
have leftover funds, where do you plan to use those funds? presidential library? >> you know, i can honestly i don't know. there are rules that regulate what we can and can't do with those funds. i know some funds were used to do repairs on the national mall through the association that governance the national mall. that's a bridge we'll cross when we come to it. but there are a number of civic-minded things to do if we are lucky to have access funds when it is all said and done. >> cnn. how many law enforcement agencies and officers will be involved in the security on the day of the inauguration? and also, how large of an area will be closed off with street closures? >> first, to answer your question, we cannot go into detail as to how many law enforcement officers will be
5:36 pm
present for the inauguration. and could you repeat your second question for me? >> how many agencies? >> i can't go into detail. >> how much will be closed off. >> we have road closures in effect and i can provide you with information on those. >> [inaudible question] veragets with all events that happen on the capitol complex, we train constantly to address them. as far as specific threats, i can't answer that right now, but just know that united states capitol police with our law enforcement partners have trained constantly in regards to issues that may come up.
5:37 pm
>> two logistical questions. there are credentials for roaming on the mall outside the capitol area. what does that get you that the public doesn't get? how do you get across the mall and pennsylvania avenue before the parade starts? does everyone have to go around the capitol and lincoln memorial? >> this is a supersatisfying answer, we can get back to you. we have a team that concentrates on logistics. that was an issue four years ago with getting across pennsylvania. i can follow up afterwards and put you in touch with the right folks. >> what's your best guess for the running time of the ceremony from start to finish and parade
5:38 pm
from start to finish? >> i can handle the ceremony portion of it. we expect that the announcements on the platform, former presidents will begin around 11:00 and 30 minutes to announce everyone that will be seated on the platform. senator schumer opens the ceremony at 11:30 and expect the president to take the oath at noonan will be a couple -- beons a immediately after that to wrap things up and the final musical act. and hope to have everyone back inside at 12:30. music begins at 9:30 in the morning and v.i.p.'s, past presidents will begin heading out to the platform at 9:45 in the morning. after the inaugural speech and the performances at the end, the president will head back in.
5:39 pm
takes the oath at noonan hope to have everyone heading back in. >> the parade? >> i love any show that opens with chuck schumer and ends with beyonce. this is a more traditional-sized parade. our parade four years ago was long. we are aiming for 2 1/2. but they can change based on weather and other events. i would also just say this parade is a little bit than what you might see at the macy's day parade. people don't stop. this is a moving parade and there is two elements that is important for planning purposes. for media that is covering it, the presidential escort, the colonel discussed with the limos down pennsylvania avenue to the
5:40 pm
white house. there is a short break after that, before what we consider the parade begins. this is just so those individuals, the president and first family can go out and be positioned for the first elements of the military and civilian units. [inaudible question] >> you can speak to that best, colonel. >> as you can imagine for all the participants in the parade with approximately 10,000 participants, there is a huge logistical dance. staging will happen at the pentagon parking lot and will go through secret service screening and security screens and get everyone lined up in the proper formation so the five divisions are clear and everyone is in the correct order. and there are actually low gist ti call teams assigned to each
5:41 pm
division to make sure they get on the right route and once they get past the white house reviewing stand, there are different areas designated for each of the elements. >> i was wondering if you can talk about there are contingency plans in case when you wake up and there is snow on the ground on monday morning. >> we do have a weather contingency plan. it's going to be similar to past inaugurations. last time it happened was president reagan's second inaugural. it will be moved inside to the rotunda and the joint committee
5:42 pm
in consultation with the presidential inaugural committee would make on sunday afternoon so everyone has time to adjust. >> the only thing i would add, our goal is to have this event go forward. that being said, we aren't going to put anyone in harm's way. the real driver on that decision-making process on sunday will be safety. as you know, we were here four years ago and cold doesn't slow us down. we'll deal with that as it comes up. look, each element of this outside of the actual swearing-in are traditions that are important to the president, important to the first family and important for the country to really show what our transition of democracy is all about. again, our hope is to be able to move forward with as many of these events as possible regardless of what the weather is. >> on the other issue -- why the
5:43 pm
reversal from four years ago as good giving more transparency. a reversal -- what specifically -- what decision was made to change that? donors' request? could you raise more money? >> to be honest, none of those were the considerations. my understanding is that we just kind of -- each of you -- they are not continuations of the same committee four years ago. we are lucky for some of us who did it the last time. and this was the decision that was made in terms of disclosure and there is the f.c.c. requirement, this was our attempt to go above and beyond that and add a level of transparency. >> over the weekend and on
5:44 pm
monday, are there telephone numbers we can call if we need to check up on something? who is going to be available to answer phone calls? >> ma'am, one more time, your question. >> is there a phone number that we need to check on anything, maybe an arrest or who can we call? >> you can call me. i'm the public information officer for the capitol police. i would be the person that -- [laughter] >> i'll talk to you afterwards. i will give it to you. >> lots of people may be needing that number. >> fair enough. 202-224-1677. >> couple other things on that. as you pick up your credentials,
5:45 pm
there is a media guide in that. that media guide is current when it went to print, which is last wednesday. there is an online version of that which is 2013pic.org, which will be updated. i don't have the number handy, but much like the other national events like super bowl or other events that the secret service coordinates with local and police departments, there will be security issues. we will get that to you. most of that information should be in that media guide. >> you want to talk about that as well? >> i have gotten a number of questions over the last few days when the media guide will be available. we anticipate later today or tomorrow morning and have background information of everything you are going to see
5:46 pm
at the ceremony and anticipated and projected, emphasize on those words, time line for the ceremony itself. that is subject to change based on what happens on monday. we anticipate that and the flow of events and all the details about that and our media guide should be public this afternoon or tomorrow morning. that will be on our web site inaugural dth senate dth gov and i'm sure everyone will have that . >> how big a crowd are you expecting that you might come to this event and could it be easier logistically than 2009? >> the short answer on that is that the presidential inaugural committee doesn't do crowd projections or crowd counts after the fact. media outlets often do. this is more in line of
5:47 pm
traditional inaugurations. four years ago was historic. you usually get larger crowds when there is a change of power and the first african-american president created more. this will be larger in size and scope. we hope it will be logistically as smooth as possible. all of the partners up here as well as a number of folks have been working very hard to make it as smooth as possible. we beg folks' patience. these are large events. the weather could be cold, dress warm and be prepared to be outside and to work with us to make this as smooth an event as possible. >> in terms of media participation, how many requests for credentials did you receive and how many did you give out? >> i don't have a specific
5:48 pm
number, but it's thousands. it is one of the most covered events in the world. it has international significance not just national significance. we have thousands of media organizations that apply for credentials. and matt can speak more to the capitol and what they're expecting and we try to accommodate. we want this to be as public an event as possible and an event that people here in the united states and around the world can join as a symbol of what this country is all about. >> "washington post." there's a lot of interesting tickets made for the parade and the ball. one crit i will on the hill is saying this can be seen as in-kind work and how many tickets are available for the public. >> i can't give you a specific percentage but can tell you about the universe that make up the ball tickets. certain percentage were given to
5:49 pm
the general public for purchase. that is unusual and unique to president obama and this inauguration. traditionally there isn't a public sale. we say thank you to folks who have supported the president, that includes staff members, that includes folks that contributed to the president's campaign. but includes volunteers. we worked very hard to make sure that tickets were made available for purchase to thousands of our volunteers to say thank you and have them participate in this event and the commander in chief's ball and i touched on this earlier, this was a tradition started by george w. bush. and president obama thought we should continue and one of his favorite parts of the entire weekend. that will be "travel wise" twice the size last time. and they will be attending free of charge. we wish we had more tickets and would like to include as many people as possible but we have struck a good balance with the
5:50 pm
size of the event and the size of tickets. >> is there anyone who hasn't asked a question? please. >> i'm wondering about the kids' concerts, half of the awedenens is made up of -- audience is made of up military family. >> some armed forces representatives and i don't have the details handy. make tickets available to d.c. school kids who have worked with the first lady's office. and it is a ticketted event. it will be at the convention center. but it is free of charge to military families and the d.c. school kids. >> on the other ball, the
5:51 pm
nonmilitary ball, how many people will be attending that and one of your advisers called it open press. what do you mean by open press, because i thought we had to have secret service credentials to cover that. >> our use of open press means that you could have applied for a credential and we give credentials out. and they are given out on a space basis and a full riser just as if the president was giving a speech or campaign event. some of the size, we don't know yet. we will be using as much of the capacity of the convention center as possible. and again, last time we had 10 official balls, this time that is two. we had six that were i believe six that were hosted just at the convention center. so we are doing two in the same space we did six last time. one of the lessons we learned by spreading out our talent, we
5:52 pm
weren't able to program it in the way we wanted it to. you go to one ball, you see one or two acts. we have a full program throughout the night for all the attendees. both balls, and if you are there, you will get a much richer experience and help us with crowd flow issues. >> these are for credentialed press? >> that's right. everything has to be credentialed for security reasons. >> you made it clear that you need credentials. >> our panel has agreed to stay and answer questions informally after the news conference and on behalf of the national press corps, i want to thank them for coming on a busy week for all these individuals and thank those who joined us at today's press conference.
5:53 pm
thank you. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> the greatest honor history can bestow is the title of peacemaker. this honor now beckons america. the chance to help lead the world at last out of the valley of turmoil and on to that high ground of peace that man has dreamed of since the dawn of civilization. >> we must embark on the new program for making the benefits of our scientific advances and industrial progress available for the improvement in underdeveloped areas. >> this weekend, public radio's back story with the american history guides. three explore the history and traditions of presidential inaugurations. live saturday morning at 11:00 eastern. on c-span 3.
5:54 pm
>> this weekend, the 57th presidential inauguration as president obama begins his second term. he will officially be inaugurated on sunday at the white house and our coverage on sunday begins at 10:30 eastern with a look back of the president's 2009 inaugural address and your phone calls and comments. and monday, the public ceremonies get under way and live coverage on monday begins at 7:00 a.m. eastern. the president will be sworn in at noon followed by the capitol luncheon and inaugural parade. all of that live on c-span. and cabinet changes ahead of the inauguration in the second term, introsecretary ken salazar who oversaw moratorium on offshore drilling after the bp spill, announced he will step down in march joining hilda solis, tim any geithner and leon panetta and secretary of state hillary clinton in announcing their
5:55 pm
retirement from the cabinet. over the state department today, it is confirmed that several americans are among the hostages being held in algeria and said no credible evidence that they have used chemical weapons. >> all right everybody. happy wednesday, before we start, let me welcome our journalist guest from china. welcome. i have one statement at the top and we'll go to what's on your minds. this is with regard to the deadly attack on the university of aleppo. we are appalled and saddened on the attack on the university which reportedly killed 80 people and injured more than 150. according to eye witnesses at
5:56 pm
the scene, regime planes launched aerial strikes on university facilities. we understand that most of the victims of this tragedy were students and refugees who had been held at the university. we condemn this diss pickable attack on unarmed civilians and those responsible for unlawful killings and violations of international law will be identified and held accountable. our sympathies and condolences go out to those devastated by this senseless tragedy. the syrian people have already endured too much loss of the assad's regime's attacks on its own people. >> before we get back to syria, can you address, if you can in these reports about americans being among the hostages held hostage in algeria. >> we condemn in strongest terms the terrorist attack on british
5:57 pm
petroleum facilities in algeria. we are obviously closely monitoring the situation. we are in contact with algerian authorities and our diplomatic counterparts as well as with bp security office in london. the best information that we have at this time is that u.s. citizens are among the hostages. i hope you'll understand that in order to protect their safety, i'm not going to get into numbers. i'm not going to get into names. i'm not go to go get into any further details as we continue to work on this issue with the algerian authorities and also with their employers. let me also say that the secretary has spoken to our ambassador in algiers, and as i was coming down here, she was on the phone with the algerian prime minister.
5:58 pm
>> i appreciate and don't want to get into other details, other governments don't have a number of confirming the number of citizens that are there. or do they not care about their citizens as much as the u.s. does? >> we will leave it to other governments to handle their citizens as they see fit. but there are americans among the hostages, i ask you to respect our decision not to get into any further details as we try to secure these people. >> what do you understand about the motivation behind the hostage taking. some militants have said this is in retaliation for the french efforts in mali and u.s. has been in support of that effort. >> i wouldn't presume to get inside the heads of the kinds of people who have done this. >> there has been no request made to the u.s.
5:59 pm
they aren't asking anything of the u.s. government at this time? >> i'm not going to get into any further details on our efforts with regard to our efforts. >> have you enhanced security measures around the embassy? >> as we always do in these circumstances, our embassy has issued an emergency message to u.s. citizens encouraging them to review their personal security. we are taking the appropriate measures at the embassy. >> is this a working message? >> an emergency message that goes out in the context of a specific incident. all right. moving on. >> your statement based on witnesses? have you been able to confirm with your own intelligence -- [inaudible]
6:00 pm
>> i'm not going to get into intelligence information here, but we have complete confidence with regard to the regime's culpability. >> you condemn in strong terms the bombing for about two years. this kind of condemnations are usually met by the syrians or active ivets -- activates or others. the situation is -- they continue on the ground in a stalemate. my question again, in incidents like this, making a change, any kind of policy, on the ground right now. >> we remain committed to the
6:01 pm
policy we have been pursuing which as you know is a combination of increasing the pressure on the assad regime with our allies and partners through sanctions, as well as supporting the efforts of the opposition both to unite the country and also to come up with an effective transition plan even as we provide as much humanitarian aid as we can to those who are suffering, including in the north and the area of aleppo. >> there was a news report the other day about an alleged chemical weapons attack, the white house put out a statement saying the information it had gathered wasn't consistent with the analysis, it was a chemical weapons attack. what is your understanding of what occurred in late december? >> let me be more definitive in the light of day here than we were able to be yesterday. let me start by saying that our
6:02 pm
embassies an consulates in the region routinely receive information from third parties about activities in syria. this information is obviously reported back to washington with regard to the way foreign policy reported this, without getting into classified cables, let me simply say it did not, that report from foreign policy did not accurately con ray is the -- convey the anecdotal information we had received from a third party rarring an alleged incident in syria in december. at the time we looked into the allegations made and the information we had received and found no credible evidence to corroborate or to confirm that chemical weapons were used. we obviously will continue to monitor syria's proliferation of sensitive materials and we have been absolutely consistent and clear from the president on down
6:03 pm
that our red lines, we have a red line with regard to use of chemical weapons or their proliferation. if the assad regime makes the tragic mistake of using chemical weapons or fails to meet its obligations to secure them, there will be consequences and the regime will be held accountable. >> was riot gas or some other agent used that might not constitute chemical weapons but was something that people might have seen -- experienced as a chemical attack? >> i'm not in a position to speculate whether tear gas might have been mistaken for something else. but i can confirm that when we looked into this, we found no credible evidence to corroborate or confirm chemical weapons. >> the report yesterday, i don't believe there was a u.s. government comment included in it.
6:04 pm
when foreign policy came to you and asked about this, did you not see fit to try to knock it down before it exploded? who was up last night dealing with this? i know i wasn't. >> let me just say that when the report first started circulate, first of all it was based on a classified cable. the white house did put out information endeavoring to knock it down. sometimes it takes a little time to assemble all the information we had at the time so that is allowing us to be even more definitive today than we were last night with regard to the back drop for this but it is a responsibility of our embassy and consulates around the world new york matter what kind of anecdotal information you have to report it. that doesn't necessarily mean
6:05 pm
that either at the time or over the longer term it is considered credible. >> two things, you said at the time we looked into the allegations, this is before the cable arrived? or if you don't want to admit the existence of a cable, was it contemporaneous with public reports coming out shortly after christmas? or was it looked into later. >> without getting too much into classified details, suffice to say we are permanently monitoring the situation with regard to chemical weapons in syria. when this particular message came in from the consulate in istanbul, we took it seriously as we do, and at the time couldn't corroborate it and
6:06 pm
haven't been able to corroborate it since then either. >> would you say that the reason you are eable to be more definitive today than last night is that, i'm asking, is it because things have been declassified that you're now able to talk about things the administration might not have been able to talk about publicly last night? >> suffice it to say there was intelligence involved here and that takes us time to work through. >> and my third one, do you have any reason to believe, forget about this incident, that the regime has used chemical weapons? >> no. none. >> my question is, for the first time and again in the past, when the regime uses chemical weapons, you will know for sure, why would something come out on the basis of anecdotal information and be quoted as
6:07 pm
evidence in this case? >> i can't spoke to, a, who would have spoken to a journalist about a classified cable and b, bhy the journalist would have printed something that was three removes away from us and anecdotal, you'll have to talk to him. >> last week, the joint chiefs of staff martin dempsey said, quote, the u.s. can't stop syrian chemical weapon attacks and preventing the use of chemical weapons would be almost unachieveable, is this your stance? that there's basically nothing you can do about the use of chemical weapons by the regime? >> i haven't seen the quote you're citing, i'm not sure about its accuracy. we have made clear in a deterrent capacity that there will be consequences if this is used or if control of it is lost
6:08 pm
by the regime. beyond that, i'm not going to get into intelligence information here. >> the foreign minister of russia said that they are confident that whatever weapons are in two locations, do you concur with this information on the storage facilities of chemical weapons? >> well, i will say that we do work with a number of countries around the world to compare information and monitor the stockpiles in syria, we obviously have had conversations with the russians and others on this issue in the past. and we will continue to do so. i am not going to get into the details of intelligence information. >> if i may followup on this point, the nuclear program over dozens and dozens of sites, do you feel the chemical weapons in syria are also spread over dozens of sites? >> again, i'm not going to get
6:09 pm
into classified information with regard to the chemical weapons program. >> how do you view that agreement? >> we have been concerned for more than a year now about the iranian regime's aiding and abetting after the assad regime, whether it's in financial terms, in terms of military training, whether it's in terms of material support, the iranian government's position has showed its completeties regard for the lives around well being of the syrian people and they are continuing to pursue this bankrupt policy that is endangering not only the syrian people but the region as a whole. before we leave syria -- go ased. >> i want to go back for a second. it does appear there were several hours where this report was allowed to fester -- well,
6:10 pm
fester may be the wrong word. it was allowed to circulate and continue to be unchallenged. if in fact it was the opinion of the administration, why did you not get in touch with the people who published this and tell them that it was wrong and that they needed to fix it and have -- does it continue to exist? without, as far as i know, without any changes. >> i'm not going to get into how we work with individual journalists. i don't think if we were on the receiving end of that you would want it sprayed out from the podium here. but as we have often said working with various connections , sometimes we ask for more time to get our ducks in a row and sometimes we are granted that by members of the fourth estate and sometimes we are not. we were able to give the
6:11 pm
response we had last night but i am able to give a more full answer here today and had the journalist waited for a more full answer, he would have had it. >> that would have entailed waiting until today. >> correct. >> why couldn't you -- i don't want to get into your personal, or whoever's personal dealing with the reporter or publication in question but it seems to me if they weren't told if you weren't able to tell them what the actual truth about it was, i'm not sure why you singled them out, the publication wasn't named in the original question, you brought it up and you seem to be trying to, you know -- >> i think you're -- >> i'm just trying to figure out why the administration on something as sensitive as this, which would have such profound foreign policy and military implications, wouldn't make the strongest case possible, i.e., the case that you're making this afternoon, last night.
6:12 pm
even the line you put out last night was not as definitive of the one you given. >> i think you put your finger on it earlier. sometimes there is classified information involved that has to be worked through before we can talk about things publicly. we had asked for time, we didn't get that time, we were able to do what we could last night and now we're doing what we could today. one more on syria before we leave syria. i wanted to advise that yesterday, secretary clinton had a chance to speak with syrian opposition coalition president, this is her first conversation with him. as you know, she had hoped to see him at the friends of the syrian people meeting in morocco. deputy secretary burns made that trip in her place. she wanted to open a channel of direct contact with him. they obviously discussed the latest developments in syria. she conveyed our continuing
6:13 pm
support for the work that the syrian opposition coalition is doing to try to unify the opposition and to work on a transition plan. she particularly commended the work that they have done to stand up an assistance coordination unit which we and other governments are working closely with to try to channel our assistance to bet meet the needs of the syrian people. she took the opportunity to reiterate her inveigh decision -- invination for the leadership to meet in washington in the near future. >> followup on michelle's, the loan to the syrian government, the iranian loan, is that indication that they are rapidly running out of resources to sustain itself? >> it is certainly our analysis that they are rapidly running through the reserve of the government to fuel their brutal
6:14 pm
campaign against their own people and you know, this is just further effort to stay in power so they are reaching out to the few friends they have left, iran being the main supporter, for cash now, and it's clear what's going on financially there. >> have you had a chance to look more clearly at what happened at the university and who is responsible for the attack on the anniversary? >> i'm not sure which particular incident you're talking about. >> there was an attack yesterday on the university where apparently dozens were killed. >> were you not here at the top when i read out our statement condemning that attack. >> i understand but we have a clearer picture as to who is response snble >> we believe the regime was responsible through aerial attacks as i said in the statement. >> it was urn the regime's control. >> you're talking about the
6:15 pm
bombing of aleppo university. i think it was clear in the statement i read out. >> two things on algeria, you said the secretary was speaking as you came down, to the foreign minister or prime minister? >> prime minister. >> when you said that you understand that u.s. citizens are among the hostages, that understanding comes from your conversations with the algerians and the b.p. security office? is that correct? >> i didn't actually connect those dots there. >> one right after the other, that's why i wanted to know. >> i understand. what i said was that our information is that americans are among the hostages and then i went on to say that we are in contact with algerian authorities, with our diplomatic counterparts in algiers as well as b.p. security offices. >> i think you said you were in contact with algeria and the b.p. before you said we
6:16 pm
understand, i might be wrong. can you say how it is that you understand that americans are among the hostages? >> i'm not going to get into further details. >> you talked about the delegation yesterday to a meeting, is there any way you can tell us more? we know that syria was one of the main topics discussed yesterday. >> i think we did a pretty full readout of that meeting, as you know, we spend a lot of time working with our turkish allies on the situation in syria. we talk about the full range of issues from the humanitarian situation inside the country, the humanitarian situation in turkey and the support that turkey needs. obviously we're in the process of deploying the patriot batteries in turkey to protect against missiles from syria. we obviously are working on
6:17 pm
assistance to the opposition on strengthening the opposition's transition plan and in supporting special envoy. you can be sure all of those issues came up. >> last week, about the aid, the immigration a couple of days ago, they were arguing on the point about the syrian situation. one of the responsible people from this institute was talking about the u.s. spent about $100 million and some feel like turkey spends about $1 billion u.s. dollars. do you think the misery of
6:18 pm
millions of people leaves up to the u.s. government administrate i -- humanitarian aid? >> we are close to $220 million. we are the largest international donor to the u.n. effort. we are continuing to look at how we can continue to support the u.n. going forward. we are obviously all in the international community enormously grateful to turkey, to jordan, to other countries providing rescue -- refuge for those fleeing the conflict in syria. we have throughout this been working with turkey bilaterally as well to provide all support they may need and we will continue to be prepared to do that. were you still -- >> on the secretary's meeting with the saudi minister of the interior, did you talk about it? >> i did not. >> can you give us details of
6:19 pm
the talks? >> i don't have much except that his royal highness was here for a round of meetings in washington, he comes regularly, it was a good opportunity for the two of them to discuss all of the hot issues in the region, as they always do. >> talking about the indian military, america has given a last and final -- what people are are saying the political system in india is under pressure for the first time since their independence. again i'm not -- india should have the right to go against those hurting and killing indians inside india and those
6:20 pm
terrorists are wanted for a long time. what is the u.s. reaction on this if -- >> our view on this has not cheanled. we talked about it a number of times over the past week. we are concerned about the state of violence along the line of control. we are encouraged that senior levels in the indian and pakistani government have been talking directly about how to calm the situation and thousand to address the concerns. we were happy just in the last 24 hours to see both governments recommit to dialogue as the right way forward on this. that's what we support. >> the pakistan form minister still in new york, if anyone had a talk with her? >> i think i mentioned yesterday that her senior meeting with
6:21 pm
u.s. government officials was with ambassador rice at the u.n. yesterday so i'll refer you to u.s.-u.n. for a readout on that. >> and pakistan? the situation in pakistan, the news media is talking about a situation during the general's takeover and many people say in pakistan it may be linked to 1971. what do you think -- what is the future of the political system in pakistan and now for the last five years or more, they have been going on. >> we had quite a bit to say about this situation yesterday, fundamentally this is an issue for pakistanis to resolve.
6:22 pm
they've got to resolve their internal political issues in a just and transparent way just to say again pakistan has an established electoral process as outlined in the constitution. that needs to be respected. we support civilian democracy in pakistan. >> just one quick one -- >> you really got a lot today. we need to let your colleagues have an opportunity here. >> just a quick one. the situation in pakistan because of the people there and here, what i'm asking, do you feel another military coup because of this ongoing demonstration? >> i think i just stated that this -- our view that this needs to be solved democratly and under the constitution. >> i have a simple question. >> simple after the complex questions that were just put forward? >> the prime minister is in new york and has offered india,
6:23 pm
proposed that the two countries should talk out the situation. what is your reaction to that? >> we favor dialogue between india and pakistan on this issue in any and all channels that both governments consider appropriate. that's right way to work through this. >> are there any phone calls from this building other than what you mentioned? >> about the line of control? our ambassador have been active, i don't have any further information about phone calls from this building. last one. >> has the secretary -- >> she is well aware of the situation. >> has there been a meeting between pakistani foreign minister and u.s. ambassador susan rice? >> enge i just mentioned they met yesterday.
6:24 pm
i refer you to the u.s.-u.n. for information. i'll refer you to u.s.-u.n. we were not participating in that meeting. anything else? >> egypt. yesterday you were pretty clear you wanned to see president mor see repudiate his comments himself. you mentioned that there was -- they met with president mor see yesterday and they expresseder that displeasure according to members -- >> i think it was today they're meeting. >> maybe the meeting was today. they were there yesterday as well. apparently there's an egyptian presidential spokesman who said president mor see's comments when he made them were taken out of context and he was not referring to individuals or races of people but rather to racist policies of a country.
6:25 pm
is that the kind of repudiation you're looking for? >> i'm going to say to you that i frankly haven't seen what president mor see's spokesperson has said. let me -- nor have i had a readout on the courthouse meeting with him. let us pledge to you we'll get an update on egypt for tomorrow. >> well, ok, but -- if that's what they're going to say and they say case closed basically is that your view? would that be a sufficient repudiation for you to no longer have concerns about the statements? >> again, i haven't seen it. i can't evaluate it. >> you don't trust me on this one? >> i generally trust you but enge i'm going to get a sense of what -- how our embassy understood it and what followup action they've had.
6:26 pm
anything else? >> there was one, there was a question yesterday about the palestinian, about some e-1 activity and then i have a question that was about the south hebron hills. was there an answer to the second part of it? >> with regard to hebron hills, this is regards to the hearings that are ongoing at the israeli high court of justice. we're obviously aware of the hearings, we're watching that situation closely. the hearings are ongoing, as you know. >> ok, understandably, but -- and i understand this is also in the israeli legal system right now but do you have any opinion on whether these evictions are legal or even do they fall in the category of yube lateral action that would be a provocative act? >> i don't think it's appropriate to comment here on an ongoing legal case in israel.
6:27 pm
>> what about the engagement with the palestinians at the present time? >> he was out in the region last week he had a full round of consultations including having a chance to see president abbas. he obviously stays in permanent contact with his palestinian counterparts by phone but i don't have anything new to share there. marg rhett? >> out of algeria right now, when you confirmed that there were americans among those taken hostage, there are also reports of fatalitiesful do you have any reason to believe that americans are among those? >> i don't have any information on fatalities at all, margaret. i'm sorry. i don't know what's happened over the last hour while we've been here. >> do you have any information
6:28 pm
about the take over and would it have any impact on the u.s.? >> we talked about the successor yesterday. we did look into the assistance situation just for your records, u.s. government assistance for f.y. 2012 for sri lanka was $27 million including $13.3 million in bilateral assistance programs primarily related to peace and security, human rights, economic growth and democracy programs. we have a 2013 request for $16.5 billion for sri lanka in the same -- million, million, what did i say? million. in bilateral assistance for sri lanka. frankly, i will say it's too soon to say what impact the actions will have on our foreign
6:29 pm
assistance for sri lanka going forward. >> have you received any response from the sleelan can government explaining why it's so unusual? >> we're obviously in contact with them. i would not say that the explanations are satisfactory in terms of the second democracy. >> reactions you mean specifically the impeachment of the chief justice? >> correct. >> i have to clarify one more -- not on nigeria but syria and the chemical weapons report. you said at the time of the incident or shortly thereafter, which is is roughly the day, 23rd of december to the end of the year, you conclude, or the administration concluded there was not evidence, or there was no reason to think that chemical weapons were used. the cable in question arrived in washington after that.
6:30 pm
much more recently. last week. was there a reassessment of the initial finding, of your initial judgment, after the cable was received? >> what i have is that we looked into the allegations at the time we received the information and the information was received in a number of different ways. including earlier. at that time we found no credible evidence to corroborate or confirm that chemical weapons were used. >> when you say, when you first got the information, when this -- did that include the time that there were media reports and other things that were -- >> if i have anything more -- >> i'm just trying to figure out, did the cable you got from istanbul, did that cause anyone to go back and look again to see
6:31 pm
whether the original assessment might have been wrong or might have been -- >> i don't have -- i don't have any information to indicate the initial assessment was wrong. >> i know, i understand but there's no -- you know -- do you know if it was looked at again? in other words by the time the cable arrived in washington this information, this had already been looked at and decision missed, correct? >> i don't have a precise timeline. i know that there was initially some email information then there was cable, that happens a lot. how much time elapsed and -- between then and when we looked into it, i don't have a ticktock on that, what i will tell you is when we received the information we looked into it and determined it was not credible. >> the question is, if you could get an answer to it, that would be great. when the cable arrived was et already known, the cable --
6:32 pm
>> why -- why is a physical cable of that much interest? >> because that was what was the -- that was what the report was based on. i don't know if the answer but by the time it arrived had it already been concluded that there was no evidence that this was a chemical weapons attack or was that conclusion made after the cable? >> i'll see how finely i can slice this piece of salami for you, matt, i don't make any promises. i think we've exhausted our top exs for the day. thank you very much. -- top exs for the day. thank you very much. >> richard fisher is the president and c.e.o. of the federal reserve bank of dallas. he'll be talking this evening about downsizing institutions that are called too big to fail. that's coming up at 7:00 eastern, about a half-hour from now, on c-span2. president obama officially launched his effort today to
6:33 pm
reduce gun violence, calling for action in congress and signing 23 executive orders. we'll show you his comments from earlier coming up on c-span at 8:00 p.m. ian. -- 8:00 p.m. eastern. >> he'd been talking about this dream he had, he'd talked about it for years. the american dream. it had become his dream and he had been in detroit a few months before and talked about, you know, i have a dream. america, someday your live, the principles in the declaration of independence. i think he was inspired by that moment. >> sunday on "after words," claiborne carson recalls his journey as a civil rights activist.
6:34 pm
that's monday. in honor of the inauguration. >> tim gallagher is a a republican member of the securities and exchange commission. he spoke at the u.s. chamber of commerce in washington and said there's not enough support at s.e.c. for a proposal to require companies to expose their political spending. he was introduced by david hirschman of the chamber of commerce. >> good afternoon. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013 >> good afternoon. the team i am fortunate to work with and lead here at the chamber of commerce was forled over six years ago before the financial crisis because at the
6:35 pm
time, on a bipartisan basis a group of folks we had commissioned together told us the financial regulatory structure that served the country well for 75 years was no longer working, it was out of kate, too many gap, too many layers and somebody should get around to doing financial regulatory reform before the next crisis. shortly thereafter a crisis did in fact happen. and the need for financial regulatory reform became even clorer to the american people. i wish i could tell you that dodd-frank, the major financial regulatory reform bill, had aheaved everything we hoped when we formed the center, and certainly it did some thins that needed to b done but despite having 400 regulations across 21 agencies, it did nothing to reduce the complexity or fundamentally modernize the structure. in some areas it fell short, in
6:36 pm
other areas it didn't act at all. so now that we are two years into it, we will propose shortly in february what we're calling our fix and replace agenda. areas of dodd frank that need to be fixed because they're not working as intened, areas that need to be added because they weren't properly dealt with in that legislation. it's important to remember when congress first dealt with regulatory reform 75 years ago, they didn't do it in one bill. they had several iterations to get it right. fenally, areas that need to be replaced just because they can't be made to work and achieve the goals that were intended. no matter how laudable. why do we do this? we do this because financial regulation impacts the way every american company, whether small, medium, or large company, whether a startup or mature firm, whether private or public, whether you're public and intend to go private or private and intend to go public, whether
6:37 pm
you're growing or trying to turn around a firm, news, need and access capital. whether you're a small company making out a credit card to buy the first piece of equipment or hire a first employee or a larger company trying to launch a new product to go to a new market, you depend on financial regulation to be right. and to have a level playing field. in fact, every way that companies of every size and shape use the financial services industry is impacted by dodd-frank. we talked about the needs of capital, whether you're public or private. credit and access to credit. that's why the work of the consumer brew row and the volcker rules are important. the way companies manager risks and the ability of nonfinancial firms to manage their financial risks, whether it's interest rates or currencies. the so-called derivatives bucket and the cash flow. we put it on that front, the fundamental role that money market mutual funds play to help
6:38 pm
many companies manage their day-to-day liquidity. all these things are happening at the same time. and the changes are significant. it's important that we get it right. this is not a question of whether reform should be more or less. it should be, we call it right way or wrong way. how do we make sure that we get it right? and for us, the definition of getting it right is to preserve the most diverse sources of capital to drive job creation and the american economy. today we will hear from s.e.c. commissioner danny gallagher who i think is well-positioned to lay out an agenda for this in the next year. we hope this is an agenda that can attract strong bipartisan support. mr. gallagher brings a unique combination of backgrounds. he started as general counsel for a financial services firm. then joined the staff of commissioner paul atkins and
6:39 pm
worked for commissioner, worked for the -- at the f.c.c. as deputy director and then acting director in one of the largest divisions. he's been on the senior professional staff, then was in private practice and about 14 months ago was confirmed by the u.s. senate as securities and exchange commission commissioner. i think everybody who who knows him will know several things about him. he is smart, he understands the complex issues. second, he is -- he has an ability to see another person's perspective and find consensus and make forward progress on issues and understands that you can achieve consensus while still remaining true to principle and finally that he is a great person to work with and somebody that folks enjoy interacting with. for those reasons and many more, we're delighted to have
6:40 pm
securities and exchange commissioner dan gallagher here as our keynote speaker. >> thank you, david, for that kind intro. it was just 14 months ago i starred, 14 months ago since i gave my first speech in this building. it seems like yesterday. but i think that speech shows how important it is for s.e.c. commissioners to get out and about. i'm pleased to be here this afternoon addressing such strong supporter of -- supporters of american global leadership in capital formation, which is one of the foremost goals at the commission. and before i can't, as you all know, i must tell you my rashes today are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of the commission or fellow commissioners. and you're about to find out why. as i'm hour you're aware, next monday the nation will observe
6:41 pm
the inauguration and martin luther king jr.'s birthday. monday also mashes the two and a half year an versely of the enactment of the dodd-frank act. to commemorate the occasion i'd like to take a few moments to talk about the act, specifically the misallocation of resources and opportunity costs that have arisen from the false assumptions underliing the act and how they continue to impact the commission's everyday efforts to carry out its mission to protect investors, maintain fair, orderly and efficient marks and to facile tit capital formation. you can say this about the dodd-frank act. it's a perfect example of not letting a good crisis go to waste. indeed, the act is the model of the new paradigm of legislation, a core concept in this case, regulatory reform, overwhelmed by a grab bag of wish list items. what continues to amaze me about the act is not only what it
6:42 pm
covers in its 2,319 pages but also the crucial regulatory issues it does not address. the juxtaposition of the two is, quite frankly, jarring. the act passed the s.e.c. through the mandate to create unprecedented new disclosure rules but not to reform money market mutual funds which we were later told are ticking time bonds of systemic risk. dodd-frank addresses extractive resource pames made by u.s.-hied oil, gas, and mining companies but leaves the risk of freddie mac and fannie mae for another day. the act fundamentally -- fundamentally restructures the infrastructure by establishing the financial oversight council and the consumer protection commission but fails to have the
6:43 pm
f.c. -- ftc and cftc share jurisdiction over similar markets. they create founding as for sifi's but does not address the short come offings the short-term funding model of banks that continue to be too big to fail. the dodd-frank act attempts to solve the financial crisis, illustrates the peril of false narratives. it justifies its mandates as answers but only after asking the wrong questions. i suppose this shouldn't be a surprise given that the statute was not a product of bipartisan compromise and was enacted shortly after the onset of the crisis. many months before the bodies charged with examining the causes of the the crisis issued their reports. this was markedly different approach than the deliberative process undertaken after the 1929 stock market crash. in total, the dodd-frank act
6:44 pm
contains approximately 400 specific mandates to be implemented by agency rule making, with approximately 100 of those falling on the s.e.c. the s.e.c. adopted final rules implementing nearly a third of those mandates and continues to devote resources to drafting additional proposals, completing required studies and implementing new rules. the rull has been a dramatic inreese in the volume and pace of s.e.c. rule making. as i said in the past, no exaggeration to say that the commission is handling 10 times its normal rule making volume with normal being the post-sarbanes oxley level, itself a marked increase from the pace before that law was enacted. as a result, the s.e.c., like other regulators is now dealing with the problem of rushed, inadequate rule proposals pushed out in a bid to meet arbitrary congressional deadlines. as you might expect, it isn't
6:45 pm
easy to promulgate high quality final rules from faulty proposals. the volcker rule serves as a case in point this increase case raises two sets of concern. the first stems if the difference between getting rules done and getting them right. smart regulation requires taking the time to understand the problem that needs to be addressed, including not only the proximate cause of the problem but also the often complex and hidden factors underliing that problem. it's at this stage where the peril of false narratives is at its greatest. for incorrectly identifying the causes of a problem, whether outright or by oversimplifying issues, makes finding the right solution far more difficult if not impossible. and it should go without saying that we need to ensure that we are performing a rigorous cost benefit analysis of all rules, whether proposed or final.
6:46 pm
the second set of concerns centers around opportunity costs in the missed allocation of limited resources. i have no doubt that the businesses represented by the chamber understand the concept of limited resources and the immediate to set clear and sensible priorities far better than does the federal government. every hour spent by the f.c. -- f.t.c. staff on drafting rules to carry out dodd-frank mandates is one less staff hour spent focusing on the commission's core regulatory responsibilities. i'm not here to enumerate the faults of the legislation as a whole. i've been allotted 30 minutes, not 30 days, to speak. but i'd like to spend a few minutes spending the volcker rule to illustrate these sets of concerns. as i'm sure you know, the dodd-frank act requires three federal banking agencies to adopt rules to implement two significant proibsings on
6:47 pm
banking entities ander that afillities -- affiliates. a prohibition on engages in proprietary trading and a prohibition of sponsoring funds such as hedge funds or private equity funds. it identifies serb specified permitted activeties, including underwriting and certain government obligations excepted from these proiks but also establishes limitations on those excepted activities. theds legislative text defines an expansive -- in expansive terms key concepts such as proprietary trading and trading accounts. it grants the fdic, the s.e.c., and others the rule making authority to further add to those definitions. the banking agencies and s.e.c. issued a proposal in october 20 11, weeks before i started as commissioner, with the cftc
6:48 pm
following in february of last year. 15 months later, the rule making remains at the proposal stage with ongoing talks between the agencies aiming to address the myriad concerns raised in over 18,000 comment letters regarding this dire, albeit presumably unintended consequence they argue would result if the proposed implementing regulations. and yet, and i quote if you look at the crisis, most of the losses that were material from weak institutions and strong relative, relative to capital, didn't come from those proprietary trading activities. they came overwhelmingly from what i think you can descroib as classic extensions of credit. those aren't my words. treasury secretary of geithner spoke them in september, 2009. in case he misspoke, i'll provide another quote from danchte speaker, this time,
6:49 pm
march 2010. proprietary trading and commercial banks was there but not central to the financial crisis. that speaker, paul volcker. don't get me wrong. as illustrated by notable hedging failures last year, bank trading and hedging practices can be a whale of a problem. it's not a problem the volcker rule or the dodd-frank act as a whole purports to address. like much of the act, the volcker rule is a solution in search of a problem. the act, however, is still the law of the land and banks have long since accepted the rowl and its implications for their business activities. in fact, i've been told by several firms that although the implementing rules have yet to be finalized they've taken significant steps to shut down their u.s. trading activities and in some cases have done so completely. even if they look to statutory texts and spird of the -- spirit
6:50 pm
of the rules to bringer that hedging and trading practices into plines, high level staff from five regulatory agencies continue to work behind closed doors to refine a rule making proposal that according to a letter sent to the agencies by a bipartisan group of six senators, quote, has drafted, could adversely affect main street businesses by reducing market liquidity and increasing the cost of capital. in another comment later, senators merck lee and levin, both supporters of the volcker rule, wrote, the volcker rule demands wall street change its culture. the volcker rule can protect the u.s. economy and taxpayers from some of the greatest risks by the largest financial institutions while providing plenty of space for the financial institutions to provide the plain vanilla, low-risk, client-oriented services that help the real economy grow. these are certainly laudable
6:51 pm
goals. almost uniformly, however, critic os of the volcker act argue that it is those very plain va nil will, main street, customer products that will be harmed not necessarily by the text of the volcker rule as set forth in the dodd-frank act but by the draconian interpretation of the rule that the october 201 proposed rules would impose on the financial industry and their customers. notably, our foreign regulatory counterparts in europe, japan and china have been our most vocal critics. i met with them in ireland where i met with a distinct lack of enthusiasm from the e.u.'s group and the independent demigs on
6:52 pm
banking. sir john vickers, chairman of the independent commission, has criticized the u.k. coalition government for backing away from his original proposal while the recent report summarizing the responses received from the report acknowledges the widespread opposition to the proposal in a charmingly understated fashion, stating they welcome the group's analysis but argued that a compelling case of trading activities hasn't been made. they felt the proposal wasn't backed by the required evidence and there was a need for a thorough impact assessment. with all due respect to my friends in the european financial regulaer to community, when a regulatory proposal is viewed within the e.u. as being too harsh and the financial industry and harmful to marks, i think it's a clear sign it's time to take a step back and re-evaluate. regardless of what happens with respect to the vickers or like
6:53 pm
then proposal, even if all the most visitry olic allegations wall street's harshest critics set forth are true, even if your financial giants act solely and ruthlessly out of craven self-interests, those institutions know that the volcker rule is not going away. as such, they've already begun the process of determining which of their activities will be prohibited under the rule as set forth in the text of the dodd frank act and proactively moving to shut down their truly proprietary trading desks as appropriate. accordingly, as my friend and colleague troy paredes and i have stated, the final write og they have volcker rule should be what banks have already done in response to requirements. the critics are no longer, if they ever did, realistically contemplating repeal of the
6:54 pm
volcker rule. they simply want us to get the implementing regulations right. the october 201 proposal fails to accomplish this goal by focusing only on the latter part of senators' merck lee and levin's call for the fact in a smart, vigorous way. actingen on the theory that banks were a big part they have crisis, they purcey this most vigorous interpretation possible of the rule's mandate. that throws the baby out with the bathwater, along with the rubber duckie, the bath tub and the plumbing for good measure. just making sure you're aweak. trying to determine which banking practices constitute proprietary trading and which are customer activities that
6:55 pm
provide liquidity it stretches its definitions of covered activity on an almost punitive basis as if based on an assumption that any trading that could result in profits for the trading endity must fall within the volcker rule prohibition. this fail wrur to separate market critical customer facing activities from true proprietary trading illustrates a second set of concerns, opportunity costs and missed allocation of resources. the entire rule making exercise so far has been carried out in a manner that is -- has weaed resources of all agencies involved. by every account, bank regulators are taken the lead role throughout the rule making process, presumably this stems if the fact that the rule applies to vast financial firms regulated by the bank regulators coupled with the byzantine nature of interagency rule making and the washington power
6:56 pm
game. the volcker rule, however, isn't about the financial rule involve but instead the activity in which they engage. those activities, the trading and hedging practices of those entities unquestionably fall within the core competencies of the s.e.c. for example, the s.e.c. built an extensive lie brir of rule making and interpretive releases concerning exceptions for bona fide hedging or market making in the context of short sales. those exceptions, which date back to the early 1980's, have trading rules set forth in 1979 rule make this erule expressly envisioned a quintessential market making activity continue to be carried out by the firms affected by the volcker rule yet the agency that's regulated securities market making in
6:57 pm
order to facilitate liquidity and promote the allocation of capital is playing a secondary role in drafting regulations to implement this rule. all of this comes with a cost. both the mission staff playing second fiddle and the banking regulators making this into workable regulation could be focused on other matters rather than spinning their wheels with no end in sight. simply put, we could be spending our time in a far more productive manner, focusing on mandates that are critically important sump as those in the jobs act as well as addressing the s.e.c.'s basic blocking and tackling. indeed, one personal frustration of mine has been the commission's inability to fully implement what i believe is the most useful and important provegs of the dodd-frank act the section 939-a mandate to remove all references to commission registered credit rating agencies formerly
6:58 pm
referred to as nationally recognized statistical regulations from all regulations. this clear and direct mandate is actually responsive to one of the core problems underliing the financial crisis. that was overreliance on inaccurate credit ratings by both investors and regulators. yet the most important rules continue to include such references. meanwhile, fsoc, charged with averting the next financial crisis, apparently spends more time hectoring the commission, a purportedly independent agency, on the reform of money market funds, an issue that falls directly and solely within the commission's sphere of responsibility but was somehow not important enough to be addressed in the dodd-frank act, than they are in focusing on the bubbles that have the potential to cause another crisis. on the issue of money market funds, i'm happy to report that craig lewis and his fine staff
6:59 pm
in our economic analysis division have completed the rigorous studies and economic analysis that a bipartisan majority of commissioners have long ago asked for in advance of considering a new rule making. we are currently working with economic analysis staff in the division of investors not shape a reform proposal base odd then that rigorous economic analysis. separately, i'm encouraged by chairman walters' commitment even as we continue to implement the mandate to focusing as well on the everyday core blocking and tackling issues that affect investors most. in the coming months, i look forward to working together to address the commission's priorities both short-term priorities such as the long overdue amendment to the commission's net capital and customer protection rules, and longer term ones such as engaging in a formal, thorough
7:00 pm
evaluation of equity market structure issues, last done in a comprehensive manner in the for the recent talk and gridlock, notwithstanding with our party and policy differences, this commission is fully united in its desire to carry out the commission's mandate to protect investors, maintain fair, orderly and efficient markets and facilitate capital formation. with a clear data and analysis-based understanding of the problems we face and the complexity of their underlying causes, coupled with the deliberate, measured allocation of our resources, i believe the commission can accomplish great things and avoid the mistakes of the past over the course of the coming year. i thank you all for your attention and commitment for advancing our global leadership and capital formation by supporting capital markets that are the most fair, efficient and
7:01 pm
innovative in the world. i would be happy to take any questions you might have. [applause] >> consensus among the commission to do things that would strengthen the product without destroying a product that from our perspective, fundamentally important to a large segment of american business. in fact, the proposal -- they
7:02 pm
clearly state the importance of money funds and want to preserve the product and lay out a number of ways to kill it. we are hopeful that the s.e.c. will be able to reassert its jurisdiction and you have indicated that among the things you are willing to at least consider would be a floating net asset value. but there are enormous complexities in the tax accounting and operational challenge. can you say what your thinking is in that area? >> now that i have a voice again with some water, jet lag and a cold, you can't hold me back. money market funds will be one of the primary issues that the commission tackles in the coming months. you know, the process is under way, but quite frankly, we at the commission can and have been proceeding without too much
7:03 pm
reference to what's going on, and i think there is a new spirit at the commission working with the staff, industry and amongst the commissioners and the consensus that we need to take some action. obviously, there has been a lot of press about potentials involving the float. i have expressed that would be a great avenue to explore, recognizing, as you point out, there are pretty serious tax and accounting issues that have to be addressed and haven't been addressed even though this has been going around the industry for four, five years. on the accounting front, i'm hopeful that as the commission has authority over it, we can figure something out there, if we can't, we are in much more serious trouble than i thought. on the tax side, with the interest in this issue and the treasury secretary being the head of it and within treasury,
7:04 pm
i would hope and expect we can find ways to mitigate if not to fully resolve the issues. on the operational side, that's something we have to work with the industry. that's something we can learn a lot about through a notice and comment process and it's something we will take seriously. i'm encouraged to see overtime, we have gotten engagement and certain discussion and i give schwab credit talking about a path forward. that makes sense if we ended up there. hopefully, we'll soon hear to a proposal coming out of the commission, something that is more tailored and much more cooperation from the industry than we have seen before. when you put together a proposal as we had last year and they call it death by hanging or shooting and you can't have these break throughs like we
7:05 pm
have been having recently. >> questions from the audience. right here. >> competitive enter rice institute. thanks for speaking to us today. my question touches on the money market role but on the authority itself. where does the financial stability oversight council's authority begin and end over this rule and other things that the s.e.c. deals with? can it come in and intervene any time it doesn't like what the s.e.c. does or doesn't do? >> it's a great question, john. not being a member of that personally, i can't tell you i know anything from behind closed doors. title 1 of dodd-frank in establishing it made clear that its members are the head of the
7:06 pm
constituent agencies. the chairman of the s.e.c. is a member. the rest of the commission is not, which i believe to be an issue in and of itself. as to the legal authority in title one, my understanding loosely is that they need to -- when they identify -- they have taken actions. they have taken the 120 route, which is to put out a proposal when the primary agency responsible for the matter hasn't done so and when they get their comments back and decide which route they want to take, they can send it back to the primary agency, in this case the s.e.c., telling them to do as instructed, to take an alternative or do nothing, but explain ourselves. i'm hoping we never get to that stage on money market funds. but your question raises a much larger issue which i just alewd
7:07 pm
-- alluded to concerning the independent agencies and how independent are you if they can drive your policy. money market funds, because they did have a role in the crisis with the breaking of the buck of the primary fund, reserve fund, obvious it speaks more to issues and other things. if you go and look to the annual report, you will see other things from last summer, including high frequency trading which is more germane to the s.e.c. and not other issues. where it begins and where it ends, i don't know. >> other questions? right here. >> jim angel from georgetown and whart ton. you mentioned that the s.e.c. is behind with the jobs acts rules. many businesses cannot raise capital until those rules are
7:08 pm
actually issued. what problems would there be if the s.e.c. issued some temporary principles-pass based rules that would allow people to raise capital in this environment while it gives you experience and time to get them right? >> good to see you, professor. i think that question goes specifically to the larger question of the problem of principles-based rules. we are present prescriptive in our rulemaking. when we try, if you look at the proposal on general solicitation, when things are more principles-based, what we get back from lawyers, you know, trade groups, please give us a safe harbor with three easy steps and a check lists to ensure ourselves against liability both from the s.e.c. and civilly. there are oftentimes a press to
7:09 pm
get that sort of prescriptive rulemaking. quite frankly, i'm skeptical it would work because i don't know if folks would take the ball and run with it. the s.e.c., we, the commission, need to get on it and get the rules proposed and finalized. the fact that it's not done is a travesty. the deadline was in july of last year for final rules. and we only got our proposal out at the end of august. i hope and expect that there's a pathway forward. it will depend on which way chairman walter wants to go. >> could you comment -- inaudible
7:10 pm
>> i publicly stated for the last nine, 10 months that i think we need to repropose the volcker rule. at the end of the day it is a legal analysis, whether a proposal as vegas the volcker proposal was that generated 18,000 rather substantive comment letters is actually actionable for purposes of a final rule. and so that said, i can be a practical guy of the final rule made sense and was clear. and legal analysis showed that we can go final, then i think we should. but i don't think that we should be at the s.e.c. left behind by the bank regulators or front-run them either. but i think our role in this process is critically important
7:11 pm
seeing most of the activity should be happening in the broker-dealer subs of these institutions. we'll see what the staffs can come up and what makes sense and see if we can move forward. >> good afternoon. on the issue of the removal of credit rating references, that was originally proposed as a separate release before money market reform got so big. since then, it has become tied with money market reform. the next release we'll address the credit ratings. do you foresee that as something that must be done together or should be done separately, you know with the issue of removal of the rating references, contingent or not contingent? should they be together, should they be separate? >> i don't have a strong personal premps as how it comes.
7:12 pm
i would like to see it and vote on it and get it done. the preference of former chairman and staff to couple it with money market reform, larger money market reform is irrelevant to me. i think we need to carry forward and simply get it done. broker-dealer capital rules, those are the two big rules on our books with agency rating references in it. and all the mandates in dodd-frank. this hits a core of the financial crisis, the failures of the rating agencies and overreliance on the ratings and yet despite that, we have conflict mineral disclosure but don't have removal. i just don't get it. [inaudible question] >> i haven't seen the proposal and i doubt it. i don't think i would push forward. again, that was just a
7:13 pm
preference last year, but i do hope regardless that it comes soon. >> a lot has been made about the slow pace at which the jobs act hasn't been implemented. in some ways, it's even slower than that because many of the ideas in the jobs act, were ideas that the s.e.c. had gathered and considered that it was going to adopt for years before congress acted. and one of our concerns is that there is the jobs act, dodd frank -- the most difficult 2/3 of dodd-frank. there is a whole area where i think you could achieve pretty broad bipartisan consensus and yet the s.e.c.'s agenda seems to be subsumed by other issues. you mentioned others. those cases are mandated. if you go back to the debate or perhaps the future debate coming on political disclosure, good,
7:14 pm
bad or indifferent, those are hardly political charged issues that consume staff and commissioner time at the expense of a whole number of other things. what path forward do you see over the next year and what's your personal view on the political disclosure proposal? >> i agree with your statement. i think there has been a lot of distraction. i have spoken publicly about the fact that we have been led astray by highly politically charged issues. we are supposed to be a bipartisan, apolitical agency, but in setting the agenda, political preferences have been made. i disagree with them. there are things that -- many mandates shock people. we are a third of the way through the dodd-frank final rules. everybody thinks dodd-frank -- hasn't happened, a third of the
7:15 pm
way through, we are doing this for years unless congress changes something. it really is incredibly important for the agency to get the priorities straight, to focus on what's important within the dodd-frank mandates and jobs act mandates, which to me is all of them and look at these core blocking and tackling issues, mundane things that will never give you the "new york times" headlines, capital rules. these are important things. this is what the agency is all about and protect investors. i have great confidence as i said earlier that chairman walter understands these issues and will get us on a pretty good path towards focusing on the right priorities. as to political campaign disclosure, that should not be one of our priorities. that is just a political wish list item. obviously, the recent promulgation of the reg flex
7:16 pm
agenda is unfortunate, but i can speak for myself and i can speak for us, we have no interest in pursuing that and given the current composition of the commission, that should give you temporary comfort. microphone coming to you. >> you and chairman walter have been proponents of municipal bond reform. where do you see municipal bond adviser we are headed and other aspects of municipal bond regulation? >> i agree with at least since i walked in the door and years before that, we need to focus attention on the muni space, all sorts of space of issues that came out in the commissioner's
7:17 pm
report last summer. where that is going to go agenda-wise, i'm not sure. we have to focus on the markets generally. it amazes people. i was co-acting director of trading markets in 2009. we had two people focusing on those markets and they were both on the muni side. there aren't people who think about those markets generally and we have 110 focusing on equity markets. there's a fascination with macro equity market issues and borne out by the fact because we are talking about rules of macro seconds that will be stale the minute we get them in the federal register. zero interest rate where investors are chasing yield in crazy places. they would rather be in a cd but
7:18 pm
they are in junk bonds. corporate debt last year was great for the corporation financing themselves and what is going to happen when the interest rates go up, in particular for the small investors who don't have the big dealing power ftas et managers. this is a big issue. that's what i would be focusing on instead. but i'm not. so i do think because of at least the commission's interest generally, it's not the two of us, that you'll see a focus on fixed income issues generally and i think that will be a very positive thing for the agency. >> follow-up on that question. i'm a reporter. what about the s.e.c.'s report that came out a few months ago and whether or not the s.e.c.
7:19 pm
will start to seek the authority over issuers of municipal bonds? >> yeah, i mean obviously the report was careful not to seek the authority and rethink -- i think there is so much that can be done outside of that, we should focus on the possible instead of the perfect. and so, again, i don't know exactly what product will come out. and i think there probably would be the potential for several interpretative releases, further round tables on issues and potential rulemaking where possible through smrb on muni issues. and i forget to respond on the muni piece. i wouldn't put it as a huge priority in the context of responding to the financial crisis, i wouldn't put it high on the list. however, i think we do owe clarity on the markets because
7:20 pm
it has been hanging out there way too long. it would be a relatively high priority agenda item for the commission this year. >> somebody over here. let me take you back to 35,000 foot level for one second. if you survey the american people, there is somehow this perception that all financial services forms are based within three square blocks in new york and maybe there is a small number of firms. as you travel the country, you realize that the financial services industry is incredibly diverse and in our view that has been a source of strength, which is that job creators of every type and size have been able to go to the right kind of financial firm, small, medium-size or large, bank, asset manager or otherwise, to get the financing and the
7:21 pm
liquidity and the risk management. i don't think that story is well enough understood and the danger in implementing 400 rules is you will begin picking winners and losers among financial firms. you will reduce the choices available and end up by not one single rule but by the combination of all of them, suffocating the way that american entrepreneurs access financial services. what's your views on that? >> you touched a chord that i have been talking about in less formal settings. capital markets versus the banking markets and what i fear coming out of the crisis, what you see in dodd-frank and e.u. and international bodies, it's the bank regulatory view of the world taking over the capital markets, the notion of
7:22 pm
derisking, safety and soundness. it sounds great when you come out of the crisis, when you have seen hell and come back, last thing you want to do is engage in risk taking or allow it to happen at all because you got burned in the crisis. but as you know the capital markets are about risk. without risk you don't have the capital markets. you have to put it at risk if you want a return. when you start talking about things like capital buffer, derisking something at 50 basis points, kill the product at the risk of killing the product. it doesn't make any sense. but this is the mindset that is per vading. something we all have to watch. because soon enough, if there aren't enough opportunities to take risk and get a return, the economy is bad enough now.
7:23 pm
see what it does after that mindset takes over. >> thank you, mr. commissioner, for coming today. thanks for your remarks. obviously, this is a global economy and financial services especially, it is important to look at it from a global perspective. and it was useful for you to remind us on the comments that europeans, especially japanese had on the volcker rule. money market mute tall funds, there is talk about european action here in the near future. i was wondering if you have any advice to our friends across the ocean as far as action or what not with respect to what the s.e.c. might be thinking of doing. >> thank you, commissioner, for your question. i was in london and dublin and i don't know which jurisdiction was more interested in the money market fund debate.
7:24 pm
big industry in both of those areas. in both places, i was told by industry as well as high-level government officials that the e.c. is on the cusp of releasing a paper on money market funds and doing so because they view the s.e.c. to be on the sideline. everyone wanted the s.e.c. to take the lead, but after the famous events of last august, we were on the sideline of never coming back. i was happy to share with these folks, which is a limited pool -- no, we are actually working and i hope and expect within the first quarter here to have a proposal out for comment, which is a great relief to some, but unknown to far too many. so if the international community was waiting and watching, the s.e.c. and that was the preference, just like it is the preference for the s.e.c.
7:25 pm
to take action and not them, they should continue to watch and wait. soon enough, it will be tailored to the problems that were experienced in 2008 as borne out by the staff study we put up on the web site. you have an s.e.c. narrative out there for the regulators to react to, to challenge and agree with, in part. and therefore, i think it will be much better rulemaking. i would hope they can do whatever it wants. it is a macroeconomic issue for us that they would want to see what we do first. >> i'm with investment news. what is the timetable for a request for information for a
7:26 pm
cost benefit analysis of the fiduciary rule for income advice and how do you see that issue developing this year? i realize it is not a mandated dodd-frank rule. does that mean it will continue to languish. >> it can't languish if it's not mandated. i call it deliberative process. the proposal the staff has worked on to bring in economic data for our analysis is pretty well put together. i think there's some language issues we are working our way through. at the end of the day, we have a new chairman here. she's trying to figure out which priorities to focus on. and i think this would be an easy one to prioritize if she wanted to because it's further down the road than others. that said, and i have said this
7:27 pm
in speeches, it's not mandated. we should be very deliberative and i'm not convinced we should be under the 913 authority. this proposal, this request for comment we are putting out is to figure out should we do anything. and if we do anything, to do we have the right analysis undergirarding it. as things go at the commission, as important this is to the commission it's not the most burning issue to me. >> let me ask one final question about -- a lot has been made about cost benefit analysis and the need for regulators particularly the s.e.c. and certainly all regulators to do a cost analysis of the regulations they are imposing and understand the benefits and many people think of that as kind of doing check the box economic study after you decided what you are
7:28 pm
going to do. and our frustration i think has been that really what it requires, what regulators should do is define the problem they are seeking to solve, range of options that would solve that problem and then find the most cost efficient. it's not a question of the cost of regulation. it's about how best to achieve a desired objective. and ultimately, there's an obligation by all regulators to do that. many regulators have viewed it as a compliance effort rather than a driver of smart rulemaking. >> it wasn't a question, but i'll respond to it. [laughter] >> i agree with your statement, and on this front will give great credit to former chairman shapiro almost a year ago mandating that the staff put together the economic analysis
7:29 pm
guidance that is up on our web site that binds the commission staff in our rulemaking process as to how they are supposed to engage the economists rgs, look at data and alternatives and explain the decision-making process. the commissioner said it, at the end of the day, it shouldn't be about this complicated process, but just proving out your work. a lot of the times the staff did do work but didn't explain the choices or the data and other things they had taken into account. this new paradigm mandates that they do it and holds us accountable. and it's a new day for the agency. there are things in there i could quibble with. there was a nonnegotiated document. this notion of mandatory versus discretionary, as i mentioned in my dissents on minerals and resources don't make a lot of sense. putting that aside, it is a new
7:30 pm
day. the role of the economists has been changed in the agency and not the expose fack toe guys they used to be. and i'm hoping we have better rules and not longer ones. and we have seen some change in that regard and hopefully to knock off these important priorities that this new paradigm comes forward and guys like you don't sue us as much. >> we don't like suing, with due deference, it gets expensive and what we are trying to achieve is to make sure that you always get ar better outcome in a deliberative process than you do in the courts. >> i already mentioned the staff study that went out on money market funds, it is revolutionary in so many ways. it is untouched by the policy
7:31 pm
makers. i didn't even read it before it went up on the web site. we put it up there. there is an appendix up there that i can't read because it is in math. putting our economists against the industry economists, they relish this stuff internal. this is a new day because we put out the baseline we are thinking about as we move forward on rulemaking, making sure we get the narrative right and don't go through -- >> i taught my daughter look both ways when you cross the street. and when you don't do the study on money funds and we don't agree with everything in there, it's like crossing the street before you look both ways. it produces a train wreck and i think we will soon know in 2013
7:32 pm
if the securities and exchange commission will be many of the long awaited issues get moved on that brings four commissioners together for a very productive year or otherwise. but we are hopeful it will be. i have the spirit of your remarks today and we greatly appreciate your willingness to lay out the agenda. and i will give you the final word. >> great to be here and stay engaged. the personalities are right and the priorities are important. but we need engagement by commenters. we need data and get these rules right. so thanks for having me. >> ladies and gentlemen, commissioner dan gallagher. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> president obama announced his gun violence plan today and recommending gun checks, ban on assault weapons and high-capacity clips and federal funds for police officers in schools. these require congressional
7:33 pm
approval. he enacted 23 measures that do not need an ok from congress. they include ordering federal agencies to make more data available for back grouped checks. appointing a director for alcohol, teeb and firearms and research gun violence. see the president's speech on gun violence tonight on c-span at 8:00 p.m. eastern. in the conversation on gun violence continues on washington journal tomorrow morning, we are asking gun owners to call in during the first hour of the program. then a round table on possible new gun lowest with the brady center and executive director of gun owners of america. later in the morning, more calls from teachers, parents and students, are they in favor of a police presence in schools. you can see "washington journal" live every morning at 7:00 eastern on c-span.
7:34 pm
>> the greatest honor history can bestow is the title of peacemaker. this honor now beckons america. the chance to help lead the world at last out of the valley of turmoil and on to that high ground of peace that han has dreamed of since the dawn of civilization. >> we must embark on a bold new program on our scientific advances and industrial progress available for the improvement in the undeveloped areas. >> this weekend, public radio's back story with the american history guys. they explore the history and traditions of presidential inaugurations, live saturday morning at 11:00 a.m. part of three days of american history tv on c-span 3. >> he had been talking about
7:35 pm
this dream that he had. he talked about it for years. the american dream. and it would become his dream. and he had been in detroit just a few months before and he had talked about, i have a dream that will america will someday realize these principles in the declaration of independence. so i think he was just inspired by that moment. >> sunday on "after words." participating in the 1963 march on washington through martin luther king's papers. featuring authors and books, president obama and martin luther king junior. >> now a look at the transportation challenges facing states. the head of the american association of state highway and transportation officials spoke in washington today. this is about 25 minutes.
7:36 pm
>> thank you very much. i want to say thank you. i think secretary lahood who had to beat his way back to the white house. great to have him join us. i want to recognize on behalf of the 50 states the tremendous relationship we have had with u.s..and the accomplishments of this administration. there is too many to name. let me just touch on the president's economic stimulus program that made $48 billion available to states, cities and counties. what was achieved? the state paved or resurfaced 34,000 miles of roads. we rebuilt or replaced 1,300 bridges. peter, working with the transit
7:37 pm
agencies, 8,000 buses, new buses were purchased. and joe, the $12 billion that the secretary mentioned that for the first time in u.s. history, we have committed dollars to help improve the high-speed rail national program. 31 states have put those projects to work all over the country and we're well on our way to having a much more extensive system of high-speed rail. and the results, when you add it all up were thousands of jobs created and a lasting legacy. let's hear it for ray lahood and his team. [applause] . the second thing is thank you is to the executive committee. i'm highly honored to receive the reward.
7:38 pm
the states care about research. the national cooperative highway research program, the strategic highway program, two of many programs that states depend on to do our work. and bob and his able staff do a terrific job of delivering a broad array of services important to the states. the role and what i have been trying to do aided by jack and janet is get the money and then you put it to work. it has been a great partnership. we treasure it. and i greatly value this award, deborah. the final thing i want to thank bob, deborah and sandy for is the chance to address this important audience. as a recovering politician, not every day i see a crowd this
7:39 pm
big. so let's have at it. the theme that i think -- picked for this presentation was "building highway capacity." . and when i was consulting with my wife dewhen bob said how would you like to speak to this audience? she said you should take the advice of walton and you heard the turtle story, mike has a wealth of these texasisms and i recognize that my wife is here and son adam. let's hear it for the most important people in my life. [applause] >> lesson number one, listen to your wife. and listen to mike walton. what he has told us that a t.r. speech should be like a texas longhorn, two points with a lot of bull in between.
7:40 pm
[laughter] >> what i want to do in this presentation is make three points. a speech should contain three speeches. highway capacity and states' ability to build capacity and ways that congress can fund it. i saw peter out here and i saw mike and the transit people all over the audience and i want to reassure and even though we are going to talk about highways, we still love you as well. states take seriously, our commitment to all modse of transportation and let me touch on -- what slide is up there right now. we like transit. [laughter] >> it's scripted here, mike. i have to say this. but, first of all, peter gave me a call at the end of this debate that a very important debate was held last spring where there was
7:41 pm
some lousy legislation that would have undercut and badly wounded long-term funding for transit and we joined people all over the country and said no thank you and that was number one. number two, we do an annual report on transit and states provide more funding than does the federal government. a year ago, we provided 13.6 to the feds, so we're proud of the state commitment to transit. and a few years back, we made a policy goal to double transit ridership in the next 20 years. so we do love you guys and support you, but i'm going to talk about highways. and when you come down to it, if you can't -- if the executive director won't talk about the need for highways, who will? what i want to talk about, the need for highway capacity and two facets to that. you need to look back 50 years
7:42 pm
to see the backlog that's been created, but then forward 40 years. as everyone is aware. most of the plans and designs in this country for the national highway system, the interstate and the arterial system we have today were formulated in the 1940's, 1950's and 1960's. if you look back 50 years, during that period, that population has doubled, traveling on our highways has tripled and the number of trucks on the road has quadrupled. you look at this next slide in the period just from 1980 to the present, the volume of traffic moving on the interstate increased 150%, but capacity only increased 15%. so the result is congestion and
7:43 pm
bottlenext all over the country. if you look forward to the year 2050 as the -- let me step back. i'm a career democrat and listened when clinton addressed the national democratic convention and the key point of his speech is when he talked about math. he said the main skill you need to judge policy proposals at the national level is math. i want to put this audience to the test. as the population gross by 100 million over the next 40 years, as truck freight doubles and vehicle miles traveled increases another increment, somewhere between three trillion and four trillion, you do the math, and judge for yourselves, with the backlog we have already documented and the demand that's
7:44 pm
coming at us whether we need additional highway capacity. the next thing i wanted to address, there is a myth out there since the big dig in boston, that states can't build big projects anymore. what i wanted to do is go through three projects that have been built in the last three years and projects going to be built in the next five years to illustrate what states are capable of and i want to move on to funding. but the classic example was right here in our background, 15 miles from the capital is the woodrow wilson bridge. when that bridge was originally built in the 1960's, it was designed to carry 75,000 vehicles a day. by 2000, 200,000 vehicles and then 300,000 vehicles. what maryland and virginia
7:45 pm
d.o.d. did, they doubled the increase, increased the lanes from six lanes to 12 lanes and two lanes for transit. but when that facility opens for service in 2008, the commute for those crossing the bridge was reduced by 40 minutes a day. john nord in utah built the legacy parkway project. this is a 14-mile new stretch of road from the northern suburbs of salt lake into downtown and when this facility opened in 2008, the commute was reduced from 44 minutes to 14 minutes. not bad. you hours of dedication of the 1.9 billion hot lane project out in the capital beltway, victor was there. great speech, victor. but d.n.i. had a dinner date in
7:46 pm
maryland last friday at rush hour. we got on the beltway and on the virginia section, we zipped. free-flowing traffic. it was terrific because that four-lane improvement was in play. when we hit maryland, i hate to say this, it was backed up. [laughter] >> california, out in california, caltrans plans to open the bay bridge, $6.4 billion replacement on labor next day. and this is by our assessment one of the biggest highway projects in the country since the boston big dig. but when you see this thing, you will be blown away by the technological innovation and the quality of that work. mike, in the front row, is partnering with indiana to build
7:47 pm
a $2.5 billion pair of bridges crossing from indiana into louisville. and mike told me a month ago when they opened the bids on the design built proposal that will build the ken if you canny, one of the two bridges, they got a very pleasant surprise about a 10% savings, 90 million. instead of a 900--plus-million project. let's hear it for mike hancock. [applause] >> mike is going to be our incoming president. curt was our president has yesterday. secretary lahood joined governor snyder and curt to dedicate this facility last july. and -- the heaviest border crossing the u.s. has with
7:48 pm
either mexico or canada is detroit-windsor and the canadians are going to finance this facility. but it's going to dramatically improve the flow between the auto industry and those two population centers and detroit. and i see joe macdonald. has been receiving the tapanzee bridge in new york a few months ago. this is going to be a $3 billion-plus project. and governor cuomo checks on her daily. the tapanzee is one of the projects. 30 more projects i could have put on the list, but i have to finish this speech or bob will shoot me. but the punch line is, when you have the political will and the means to build the facilities,
7:49 pm
the states can build what the country needs. so, then we get to the challenge, the secretary just laid out is how are we going to pay for this. i want to talk about two ideas. it's a great burden has been lifted from my shoulders now that they can't fire me -- actually they could fire me tomorrow, but wouldn't cost me that much. [laughter] >> i can put ideas on the table -- as a matter of fact, my staff, i said put out a press release on this, make me look good and were careful to point out, retiring executive director. [laughter] >> if it works, they'll take credit for it. if it doesn't, he's history. [laughter] >> i want to put two ideas in front of you, a $50 billion idea that senator wyden of oregon has been working with us and one, a newer idea that steve and i
7:50 pm
dreamed up in a bar in italy a few years. first of all, the president has been talking about stimulating the economy with transportation infrastructure investment. ron wyden of oregon and a republican from north dakota have been pushing for a trip bond program, $50 billion to be distributed, $1 billion to every state. we love the program, but it is going to help metro states, urban states. this concept of oregon and north dakota senators is a billion to go out to every state, so little states and big states all get the same benefit. this would be distributed over six years and the cost to the treasury would be paid for. and there would be no debt incurred at the state level. we think that that proposal has tremendous potentials.
7:51 pm
senator hoeven came by to speak to us last year and wyden last year. mentioned your program and we would love to see it. the next thing i want to put on the table and this should scare the pants off of all of you. this is real and this is jack's work, so you know it's true as well. [laughter] >> true, real and scary. that's a good description of jack. but what jack tells us, and i think the facts show and the section secretary mentioned this, we have enough money in the pipeline because of map-21 to sustain highway spending for two years. as we approach october of 2014, the bottom potentially drops out from under the program. we hit a fiscal cliff in transportation. the highway program, unless we can find resources, the highway program would have to drop from 40 down to 6 and then 11 to 3.
7:52 pm
the question is, what alternatives are out there that enable us to sustain the solvency of the highway trust fund and pass in a republican house. that's the big challenge. senator boxer and senator inhofe, soon to be senator vitter, there has been a bipartisan coalition in the senate that wants to sustain investment in transportation at current levels. it's tougher in the house. speaker boehner was with us last cycle. and we got there, but the question is what kind of sustained revenue measures can you pass. and so, we're looking for a tax reform proposal that would change the subject from simply raising rates. because what boehner said, republicans will support increases in revenue, but not necessarily increases in tax rates. so we are trying to find what
7:53 pm
will have ressonance with a -- enough republicans in the house and get enough senators to join us and then we're off to the races. so the concept i want to put on the table is to replace the 18.4 cents per gallon excise tax on fuels with a sales tax on fuels. now there are 12 states that already have sales taxes on fuels. it's usually a combination, north carolina's one, new york's one. california used to. it's changed. but those states that have had sales taxes as well as fuel taxes are seeing their receive news increase more from the fuel tax than the sales tax. our concept is to replace the 18.4 cents. for gas, it would be an 8.4 cent
7:54 pm
increase -- not increase, 8.4 cents rate on gasoline and 10.6% rate for diesel and we have set the rate at a point where it sustains the solvency of the highway trust fund. we are currently spending $15 billion more from the highway trust fund than receive news coming in and that's not sustainable. we are hearing conservative republicans in the house don't like to transfer money from the general fund to the highway trust fund. we are thinking what would they like better. and maybe if we have a system where we go back to the system that has been the case in transportation for 50 years where highway users pay their own way, sustain the solvency of the trust fund. here's the chart. we are talking about bringing in $52 billion rather than $37 billion the first year and then
7:55 pm
seeing it increase over time. so the consequence of this program is if you look at three different figures, what will it take to sustain highway and transit funding at current levels for the next six years? $320 billion. if we look at revenue from excise tax, we see $236 billion. that's bad. if we enact the sales tax option which automatically goes up as prices of fuel goes up, it is indexed to price, you bring in $350 billion. by my math, 350 is better than 236. there is $100 billion in resources that would flow to the states and make a difference. now, we'd like to encourage lobbying -- i don't know if you are restricted from lobbying, but what the heck. if you love this brilliant idea and want to go speak to your
7:56 pm
members, here's the four questions we want you to ask them. first of all, member of congress, do you want to sustain the program at current levels or do you want to see it cut and lose thousands of jobs? what do you think their answer is going to be to that one? that's what they did in map-21. number two, do you want to sustain the program by transferring more general fund money from the treasury into the highway trust fund or do you want to make transportation pay its own way? good question. and incidentally, if we do the proposal that i just put on the table, the consequence will be to eliminate that transfer of $15 billion a year. over 10 years, you would be able to reduce the deficit by $150 billion. not a bad idea. and then if you could do all this and would only cost the average driver less than $1 per week per car, would that be a
7:57 pm
reasonable burden to impose? so i'm floating the idea. we are beginning discussions with senator mark warner of virginia. he was part of the gang of six, gang of eight. we are encouraged by what we're hearing from him. chairman bill shuster in the house came to our meeting in pittsburgh in november, and he said, listen, folks, we know that the central question congress will have to address next year is revenue. we are open to ideas. no guarantee that they can pass anything. but bill shuster is open to any and all ideas. so what i'm asking you to do is to join us in the battle that lies ahead this next couple of years and demand that congress provide long-term funding for transportation. you know, the big issue that every member of congress is concerned about is with
7:58 pm
deficits, long-term fiscal viability of the country and cutting spending and raising revenue, that combination is what people seem to be thinking of. but too often they lose sight of the fact that we have two deficits in this country. you have the looming federal deficit, but you also have this deficit in infrastructure. what it takes to sustain mobility, the economy, society. we can't ignore one by taking care of the other. there has to be a package deal. the simpson-bowles commission recognized it had to be part of the package. you have to demand that transportation be part of this overall solution that is put together and get into whether ideas have a better chance of enactment. but what our stance is, if you simply go to the republican caucus and say, let's raise taxes, they'll throw you out of
7:59 pm
the room. but if you go to them with a proposition, can we reduce the deficit of $150 billion? can we make the program pay its own way and can we sustain jobs and the solvency of the highway trust fund all in one, i think we'll have something to go on. again, thank you so much for the cary award. we value this and i appreciate the recognition and we want to commitment our -- continue our commitment to research and debate opportunity to share with you the thoughts on this idea. what you heard the secretary say is tony, jack and i are headed out the door. jack and i in two weeks, tony in about six weeks. jack and i are both printing up new business cards. [laughter] >> i have a couple in my

tv
Public Affairs
CSPAN January 16, 2013 5:00pm-8:00pm EST

News News/Business.

TOPIC FREQUENCY Us 36, U.s. 25, Syria 16, Volcker 16, Washington 12, America 10, Pakistan 9, Schumer 8, Algeria 6, Matt 5, Virginia 5, India 5, New York 5, Biden 4, The S.e.c. 4, C-span 4, Obama 3, United States Capitol Police 3, Pennsylvania 3, U.n. 3
Network CSPAN
Duration 03:00:00
Scanned in San Francisco, CA, USA
Source Comcast Cable
Tuner Channel 91 (627 MHz)
Video Codec mpeg2video
Audio Cocec ac3
Pixel width 704
Pixel height 480
Sponsor Internet Archive
Audio/Visual sound, color


disc Borrow a DVD of this show
info Stream Only
Uploaded by
TV Archive
on 1/16/2013
Views
76